Let's just go full blown cliche and hold nothing back.

After all, that municipal park, wherever it is, represents the entirety of this country. Right?

I think the line of the authoritarian state is too restrictive. For example, arrest those that visually have alcohol in the park but dont subject everyone to a search. I believe in probable cause, something that authoritarians hate.

Ticket those with cans in their hands, but don't search coolers and purses and backpacks and the like....

Congrats!

...searching bags and video surveillance, no thank you.

Or, you can, but then you don't in any sense actually have a "no alcohol" rule.

need to search bags. Do you understand probable cause? Those caught with alcohol should be punished not those that dont have alcohol. But freedom is hard and authoritarians see that it's easier if we search everyone to catch the few.

Society has to draw the line. I say arrest people that are drinking alcohol and leave everyone else alone. Authoritarians are afraid that someone might get away with violating the law therefore everyone must suffer.

Seriously, most people get over that mindset some time in their teenage years.

If you don't search, people will sneak alcohol in. If people sneak alcohol in, you will have drunk people all over the park which is what you're trying to prevent in the first place. So rather than punish retroactively, you just keep people from taking the alcohol in.

it's more about not being seen drinking alcohol than anything.

(Drunken kickball league veteran here.)

They then have to drink it to get drunk. It's easy to watch for people drinking alcohol and especially easy to see people that are drunk. In my area where I live we have long had rules against the consumption of alcohol in parks. On occasion people get caught drinking alcohol and on a rare occasion people get caught for being drunk. It is not necessary to search everyone.

I support the Constitutional concept of probable cause.

This is an ordinance designed to keep alcohol out of the park in the first place.

authoritarian overkill.

They will just put it in a sports bottle or some such, disguised as a soda or juice drink.

we used to go to a drive-in theater to watch movies. The theater makes the bulk of it's money from concession sales and would be out of business without it; but the owners realize that americans like to bring their own snacks to the drive-in. The owners had a stipulation on outside food and beverage that charged the customer 8 dollars per carload if you bring in your own food and drink. This was a fair way of dealing with freedom for the customers and maintaining the theater's solvency. Alcoholic beverages are restricted and theater goer's behavior is tempered by a couple roving security people. Before entering the theater the customer had to acknowledge the existence of outside food and beverage in the car to be able to pay the fee for it. Often security workers asked to search the vehicle before entrance- to be sure that there is no outside food or beverage being snuck in the car and to make sure alcoholic drinks aren't brought on the property. The theater owner is not an authoritarian asshole for putting these policies in place; rather the owner was attempting to make sure that the safe family atmosphere was maintained and to be sure that all theater goers paid their fair share for the experience.
Maybe we ought to just trust the word of law breakers, cheaters and sociopaths. Yeah...that'll make us all safe and free from authoritarian nonesense like rules and regulations and laws that seek to defend the defensless. Then we can all share in the freedumb being offered by the know-it-alls that like to call everyone else "sheeple".

... make your head explode?

I was watching television yesterday, and I damn near died: Do you realize that quite literally every moment of television is the result of "video surveillance"? And this is the land of the free? I think not!

I dont like the surveillance state and I wont quit resisting just because I am losing. I say no to the Authoritarian Big Brother State while I know that it does offer comfort to the conservatives among us.

Video cameras at ATMs have saved a lot of people a lot of grief when someone steals their card.

Video surveillance in parking lots provides an element of security for the vehicles and the owners.

Video surveillance in bank lobbies, convenience stores, and gas stations. duh.

I have no problem with any of these. Why would I object to video surveillance in a public park?

Dat's Where Da Real Freedom Is!










for the sarcasm impaired

That seriously made me laugh out loud.

Thanks

I think you know the rest!

But back in Sixties the #4 of July could be many months out of the year for all of us neighbors.

We lived just a few miles away from Disneyland so we would climb unto our roofs and watch all of the skyrockets go up many times

OK then ... My Bad


yes, more



http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35484383/ns/us_news-life/t/new-law-allows-loaded-guns-national-parks/#.UdXQJjvMCSp

^snip^


WASHINGTON — Loaded guns will be allowed in Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon and other national parks under a new law that takes effect Monday.

The law lets licensed gun owners bring firearms into national parks and wildlife refuges as long as they are allowed by state law. It comes over the objections of gun-control advocates who fear it will lead to increased violence in national parks.

"No pursuit of happiness."

caught, and eliminated.

It is sad but true.

If police find contraband in bags or coolers, are they required by law to call in a drone strike on the perp?

-90% Jimmy

And the video surveillance is true.

At Sand Cove Beach here in Sacramento, they watch for fish and game infractions. If you keep a fish that isn't big enough or fish with the wrong type of hook, they will swoop down on you like crazy. The fines are outrageous. I hear that the rule book is thick. Who would want to fish?

BUT, everyone drinks at Sand Cove Beach. And smokes pot. I haven't seen so many joints in my entire life than I have down by the river. Cause of the medical marijuana laws I guess. ??

In regards to shelters...are we talking tarps to keep the sun at bay? If so, that is just stupid.

"saving" their place. Happens here all the time.

There are locking gates at Sand Cove Beach....close at sundown and open at sunup.

If you're car is still down in the parking lot, you are SOL.

We have eaten or destroyed 9/10ths of the fish in the ocean. I've been on islands in the tropics where peoples' livelihoods have been destroyed because the fish that fed and funded them are gone. Granted, much of the responsibility for that is not on some recreational fisher folks in Sacramento, but if people everywhere don't start taking the irresponsible overuse of our natural resources seriously the we are all screwed.--and if there's a better way to do that than big fines for people that can't get it through their thick skulls that you need to leave small fish behind and/or not use hooks that are gonna catch the wrong type of fish, then let me know what it is.

what's up with this "wrong type of hook" business? Are they referring to artificial bait as opposed to live bait or what? I have never heard of a wrong type of hook.

??

I understand the need for some rules. I don't want to try to memorize them all. I don't understand the need for the very heavy fines.

It seems that the "law" cares more about fishing rules than enforcing the rule that states that all children under 13 MUST be in a lifejacket if they are in the river. But I have yet to see any parent or guardian ticketed (misdemeanor) for allowing their child to swim in the river, with a huge current, without a life jacket. I guess there isn't enough money in that. And this is after a 16 year old boy drowned a month ago. And, I have seen the sheriff's dept and the city police at the river NOT enforcing the life jacket rule. But damned if I haven't seen fish and game down there every other day checking licenses.

Just doesn't seem right. I guess fish are more important than children.

Yeah, stupid city wanting to keep the possibility of a massive fire outbreak in a public park filled to capacity to a minimum. ptooey.

You couldn't start a wildfire in that park if you tried. You really don't know much about the subject apparently.

If you think having a park crammed full of people cooking over grills & shooting off fireworks at the same time is "safe," then YOU are the one who doesn't really know much, not me.

If it's real, then why would ANYONE want to spend the day there? Practically anything one would do on a picnic is prohibited. Can't bring your dog? Good grief!

And the prohibition on shelters...I assume they mean those pop-up canopies? So people can't shade themselves from the sun?

Massive fail!!

They're rolling in their graves.

STAY OFF THE GRASS!

But maybe whoever thought up that sign could use some of the other stuff. Park users would then thank them for not being so anal with public property.

The colonies are free and independent of Britain. that doesn't mean they have no laws or regulations.

to be you.

'Parks should have rules'

which has nothing to do with Independence from Britain. The OP is silly.

If you can find a park with no rules, go to it. Most municipalities are going to make a few rules. Probably because at one time drunk assholes screwed things up.

In that regard it succeeds.

The irony fails - independence was a different issue. We could have had independence from Britain and had any other type of government afterward.

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?

song

too true.

used for the same purposes but which come with a charge or fee for their use.

9. No smiling (showing upturned ends of your lips or your teeth could be seen as a sign of aggression and cause the cops to see you as a terrorist)
10. No fun allowed. No exceptions!!!

I wonder if they will be doing cavity searches for the hell of it too.